8 



tions of Messrs. Marcou and Capellini could but corroborate the facts already 

 known from the reports of Dr. Hayden. They recognized the accuracy of 

 the statements concerning the stratigraphical distribution of the members of 

 the Dakota group, as also the conclusions advanced on its age. They even 

 acknowledge that after ascertaining that the American geologists were right, 

 they had been unable to pursue their explorations to as successful a result as 

 had been done by Dr. Hayden, having failed to discover the line of super- 

 position of the Benton group with its animal fossils to the red-sandstone 

 bearing plants. 



In the mean while the interest awakened by the discussions in regard to 

 these plants and to their positive relation to the age of Nebraska sandstones 

 had incited new researches, and the result was the discovery of a large number 

 of better specimens, representing some species already known, and many new 

 ones, too. In the same year (1863) Prof. F. B. Mudge, of Manhattan College, 

 Kansas, collected, as State geologist, some splendid specimens of Cretaceous 

 fossil plants, which were sent to Prof. F. B. Meek and to the Smithsonian 

 Institution. In 1867 Dr. John Leconte, while connected with the survey of 

 the Union Pacific Railway, obtained also a number of fine specimens of fossil 

 leaves from the same red shales of the Dakota group, near Fort Harker; 

 and about the same time, Mr. Charles Sternberg, who was domiciled in that 

 vicinity, discovered some localities rich in remains of fossil plants, and sent 

 many specimens of them to the Smithsonian Institution and to Dr. Newberry. 

 From the examination of specimens furnished to me by Dr. Hayden, Dr. 

 Leconte, and Professor Mudge, I prepared a paper entitled On Some Creta- 

 ceous Fossil Plants from Nebraska, the first paper published in America de- 

 scribing fossil plants of the Dakota group. This memoir 1 gives an account of 

 fifty-three species, eight of which were known already from the Phyllites du 

 Nebraska, by Professor Heer, three referable with doubt to others already 

 published, and the balance, forty-one species, considered as new. Soon after, 

 a second paper, partly on the same subject, was published by Doctor New- 

 berry and distributed in pamphlet form. 2 This very interesting memoir, 



1 American Journal of Sciences and Arts, vol. xlvi, No. 136, pp. 91-104. 



2 Though I do not attach any importance whatever to the right of priority of authorship for species 

 of fossil plants, known from mere descriptions, I take this opportunity of fixing dates in order to show 

 that my paper had precedence in distribution, if not of publication, to that of Dr. Newberry, and that 

 therefore if a few identical species are described in both memoirs, under different names, I am in no way 

 accountable for it. My own report, as seen from its datnm, was delivered to Dr. Hayden 19th March, 1868, 

 and published in the Journal (loc. cit.) July, 1868. Dr. Newberry's paper is marked by him as read the 



